Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/528,932

HARD COATING FOR CUTTING TOOLS WITH EXCELLENT WEAR RESISTANCE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 05, 2023
Examiner
HORGER, KIM S.
Art Unit
1784
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Korloy Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
192 granted / 274 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
318
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.9%
+9.9% vs TC avg
§102
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
§112
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 274 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in the Republic of Korea on 22 December 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR10-2022-0181851 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05 December 2023 has been considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claims 3 and 5-6 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3 recites “in the rage of”, which appears to be a typo and should be “in the range of” Claims 5 and 6 each recite “Wherein” (i.e. using a capital W) but should be “wherein” (i.e. using a lower-case w). Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “(0.005≤x≤0.1)” in line 9 and recites “(Here, Me includes one or more selected among Ti, Cr, Zr, Hf, V, Nb, Ta, Mo, and Al)” in lines 10-11. The claim is considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the features introduced by the parentheses are (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. In the interest of advancing prosecution, the disputed limitations will be considered to be required features of the claims. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the sum" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because a sum has not been previously introduced in the claim. Although the recited sub-coatings would necessarily have a thickness (i.e. the limitation “the thickness” as recited in lines 3 and 4 are not considered indefinite), a sum is a result of mathematical calculation and therefore is not an inherent feature and so should be introduced in the claim using the indefinite article “a”. It is noted that claims 2-4 each introduce ranges as “the range”. This limitation is not considered indefinite because the range is immediately defined and therefore the meaning of the term in clear. It is noted that claim 6 introduced “the lattice constant”. This limitation is not considered indefinite because a lattice constant is a material property that must be necessarily present in a crystalline material (i.e. the sub-coatings are considered to be at least semi-crystalline due to having a cubic structure as recited in claim 1). Claims 2 and 4-6 are rejected as they depend on a rejected claim. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-6 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The following references are considered the closest prior art: Masumoto et al. (JPH07180038, previously cited, machine translation of written description attached) discloses a high hardness film for preventing wear on machine parts and tools. The film has a general formula of Ala Mb where M is selected from a list of elements that can include Mn at a fraction of 1.5-40 at% and the film has a gradient of the amount of nitrogen (forming a nitride). However, the film does not include the recited alternating layer of MeN. Kobata et al. (JP 2009-203489, previously cited, machine translation of written description attached) teaches a hard coating for a cutting tool that can include at least one of a list of elements that includes Al and Mn, etc. and may be a nitride. However, Kobata does not teach the coating to be an alternating stack of sublayers and does not specify any specific proportion of Mn. Yanagisawa et al. (JP 2020-055041, machine translation attached) teaches hard coating layer for surface-coated cutting tool. The coating film has a composite nitride layer or composite carbonitride layer of Ti, Al, and Mn with a cubic structure. The coating may have a lower layer of a Ti compound and an upper layer containing at least an aluminum oxide layer. However, the layer containing Al and Mn has a non-zero amount of Ti, based on the sum of α+β (i.e. sum of Al and Mn when considering only Al, Mn, and Ti) being 0.505-0.950, and therefore does not meet the limitations of Formula 1. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIM S HORGER whose telephone number is (571)270-5904. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 4:00 PM EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /KIM S. HORGER/Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 05, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601939
FILM-TO-GLASS SWITCHABLE GLAZING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594632
TECHNIQUES AND ASSEMBLIES FOR JOINING COMPONENTS USING SOLID RETAINER MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582255
ADJUSTABLE SUSPENDABLE DECORATIVE ARTIFICIAL TREE SYSTEM AND ASSEMBLY FOR WINDOWS, CORNERS, AND WALLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576618
DISPERSION, RESIN COMPOSITION, INTERMEDIATE FILM FOR LAMINATED GLASS, AND LAMINATED GLASS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12553137
COATED CUTTING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+20.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 274 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month